SNAFU
-
Posts
117 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by SNAFU
-
-
Can you answer this..where are BF based?
If I told you they'd ban me from the forum.
(transalation: I don't know but I bet its a dark and dreary place)
-
Thanks for the informative replies SNAFU & Sgt Schultz :-)
You're welcome!
-
No, I tried, but I couldnt. If its still 2 to 3 weeks out, that gives me time to fix my 'F5' key on this keyboard and get ready for the next refresh marathon
No metal case for you!!!
-
For your work to post the great videos!
(I think he deserves his own "Thank You" thread).
SNAFU
-
Casualties to bayonet wounds and injuries from other types of hand-to-hand combat weapons were such a small proportion of overall battlefield casualties in WWII that they don't even show up on the charts.
This is not to say that bayonet charges, corps-a-corps brawls etc. NEVER happened. They did. But they were rare, and when they happened they often got written about precisely because it so was unusual.
WWII-era infantry weaponry wasn't as deadly as the modern stuff those of us who play CMSF have been playing with for the past few years. But it was still effective enough that it was usually suicide for infantry to try to close with an enemy until absolute fire superiority was achieved and the enemy was thoroughly suppressed. So usually, fighting reached arms-length distance only after one side or the other was so heavily attritted and suppressed that rout or surrender followed shortly thereafter.
There are, of course, many exceptions. And I agree that it would be best if the CMBN game engine did *something* to represent close combat, however abstractly. But it's important to keep in mind that we're talking about an unusual, outlier event.
Once caveat: Game players are probably quite a bit more cavalier in how they push around their pixeltruppen than real life commanders were. So it may be true that close combat will happen more often in CMBN games than it did in real life.
I agree. Look at the records of the 101st AB and you will find very little hand-to-hand action. And they were one of the most aggressive units the Allies had. From what I've read, most Hand-to-Hand occurred in urban warfare and more often on the Russian Front than the Western Front. When Germans and Western Allies got that close to each other, somebody usually surrendered...
-
i see, so because he could see quite far from his positions upto the german likely entrance point. Then the attacker would have got a fair bit info straight away about his positions? So if i was to place my infantry quite far back from the trees, then there is a possiblity that i could race back in to that tree line with little or no casualties.
Hi para--
This is a good place to ask tactics questions but you might get better responses when more people have the sim on their computers.
(on the other hand--everyone might be playing instead of posting when that happens).As far as tactics: It was common practice for a unit to deploy in a triangle type formation ie--for a platoon, 2 squads would be forward and on behind them in support. That offered some flexibilty to move the "back" squad to fill gaps or respond as needed as the situation unfolded. Heavy weapons attached to the platoon would be placed to their best advantage for support. How this was done depended upon the tactical situation.
The same rule applies to Company level as well--2 companies forward and 1 back supporting the others with heavy weapons elements deployed as per the situation.
Does this work in CM? Well--in my experience, it can be very effective. When one of my squads gets beat up I can move the fresh reserve one in to bolster it or even cover its withdrawl. Sometimes the arrival of a fresh unit on the line creates a tipping point for the opposing force, especially if they have all troops committed on the line. In that case, the fresh unit can often take advantage of the fatigue and "stress" that your enemy is under. (But it doesn't always work
)!As far as your original question: Your idea about deploying your units behind the tree line and then moving them up can work both ways. Tyrspawn had no way of knowing for sure that that tree line was going to be shelled. In fact, it seems he didn't expect it. If it hadn't happened that way, his troops would have been in a great position to repulse the attack made on them. BUT--if the barrage hadn't occurred and he still had to move his troops forward, they would have been more vulnerable because the Germans would have been able to fire at them while they were moving.
So it's really a trade off--calculated guesses, opposing force composition, Artillery Support? Unknown until the battle commences. Sometimes you guess right and sometimes you guess wrong. And then there is the other huge factor in play-LUCK. Sometimes the perfect setup/tactic is undone by one lucky shot.
All said, there is no single tactic that works all the time. You have to learn what works best "for you"--creating your own style can pay dividends when you play head-to-head. Sometimes the "wrong" initial setup is what tips a battle to your advantage because it wasn't expected by your opponent...
I still like the 2 forward/1 back when I can do it though. There's a reason that doctrine has been embraced by the military.
Cheers!
SNAFU
-
Perhaps there are elements of this thread that could best be summed up by Donald Sutherland. "Hey!" Take it easy Big Joe. A Lot of these people have sensitive feelings!"
-
We nit pick because we care. It's the people who don't care enough to bother that you have to worry about, because they're the ones who will have moved on to the next Call of Duty game in two months time. The nitpickers are the guys who stick around and, generally, contribute to the community.
Or at the very least, give others something amusing to read.
-
After spending thousands of hours modelling these vehicles Ill have to disagree with that...panthers, shermans, tigers and many tanks all have engines that are visible from outside of the vehicle through their engine covers. Any fragments, be it from grenades or even small arms fire, that passed through these covers has the chance to knock out oil lines, water hoses, electrical fittings, etc. Even the Abrams has a weak spot to the rear some half century later that required modification for an urban environment (albeit to rpgs).
Dan
I had a relative who was a tanker in WWII. He never talked too much about his experiences except for a couple times that he opened up some. He said one of his scariest times in the war is when they were in action (or at least in the vinicity) and they lost contact with their inf platoon. They withdrew until they could link up again. In his definition: Tank only vs Infantry=Knocked Out Tank.
I'm glad to see that the seriousness of that fact is represented in the sim. And after watching the video--I now call it a simulation rather than a game.
Looks Great!
-
....so much for my first post on the forum!
It's a good 1st post. Ya done Wisconsin proud!!!
-
The Allies wouldn't have had a chance without Sgt Rock.
-
Show me? Need proper visual confirmation please.
In the "Estimated Size of CM:BN Download?" thread: Post number 2.
-
Sorry, my bad. Won't happen again.
...now where did I leave that Tiger...
In that context, I hope you have to find it by using Stuarts.
-
Of course they could all head down to the local tapas bar and order fresh calamari, good olives, real tortillas and a bottle of the latest regional wine. None of the above available in the mid-USA.
To live in Spain again... But here I am.
Mucho suerte pero todo malo.
-
Deliberate destruction of a bridge is one of those features that sounds far better in abstract discussions than actually would be in terms of historical reality or an overall net positive impact on gameplay.
Steve
But think of the "Damn it" and Frustration factor. IE--"Damn it! That was a short scenario!!!"
Of course, that'd only be really fun if you were there to see the player's reaction.
-
Can Battlefront include a clause in their NDAs that it is prohibited by betatesters to tease the customers? :mad:
Hey--if ya got it, flaunt it
It's small compensation of what a PITA being a beta tester really is (been there, done that)!!! -
I think I'll waiver on this one and instead of pre-ordering (for the tin box ) I'll wait and see how the release goes. Not meaning to take liberties and use you chaps as guinea-pigs of course.
Speaking for myself--I've been used for worse things and still had a good time.
I hope my bet is right and that I'll see you in the Bocage sooner than later.
-
Fixed that for ya.
Michael
Thanks. I figured I'd let my post count climb a little before I went there! -
Well...I've kind of got it already
But do you have the metal case?
-
Don't denigrate the legitimate concerns of CM fans. I want the game, but even if only on principle I'm not going to tolerate unknown and possibly injurious software on my system.
I don't blame you. Caution is always prudent as is asking questions.
There are a couple other threads on this forum about the protection being used for the game and I'd recommend giving them a look (they can't be buried very far down the list). From what I've read (and thought about) the protection for this product doesn't seem overly harsh.
As the owner of a computer shop, I deal with software licensing every day and it is a PITA. However--software developers really have no choice but to take these steps to protect their investment. And it is a Huge Investment. A lot of money goes into the product before they can expect to see their 1st Guiness in the form of profit.
I'm not saying just accept it. I refused to accept Ubisoft's DRM for SH5 as I felt they were going way too far. (They haven't seen a dime of my money since). But from what I've read about BF's agreement, I'm really not worried. I have a couple customers that might fit the category of roasting their system 4 times in one year but I certainly hope you don't fall into that minority
.Again, I respect a cautious approach when it comes to computer and software purchases. But I doubt BF is very interested in data mining or snooping my browsing habits (but I'll be checking
). Hopefully they will be too busy working on the next module in the series (after a tying on a serious bender of course).So I've pre-ordered and wait with twittering anticipation for the release. In all probability, there will be many not "risking" the product because of license agreements. But I won't notice. I'll be enjoying the game!
Cheers!
-
Mine's late April.
But I don't think I count.
Well--with a post count like that, I can see why you'd be over-looked.
-
Wasn't Steiner a Corporal on the Eastern front?
Men like Steiner were Germany's last hope. And in that sense, he was a truly dangerous man.
-
I'm pretty sure they're holding off for my birthday which is early May.
-
Or more, if you like to **** up your system often!
And that's the other reason I'm not worried about it!!!
). Hopefully they will be too busy working on the next module in the series (after a tying on a serious bender of course).
Combat Mission: Battle for Normandy Video AAR 2, The Quick Battle
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
I agree completely. If that was a 2 player scenario and I was the German there's a real good chance I would have shelled that tree line before advancing. Of course, if that had been the case, my opponent probably wouldn't have been deployed there...